So silly you going off in unrelated directions, because point for point, what I wrote has been discussed on this board multiple times, except it's all the more damning seen in one paragraph.rattle rattle blah blah. those lefty scientists make your life and your rambling possible. your car run your medicines and most other things. righty science thinks the world is 6k years old so why make it a better place. see easy to throw junk out without proof.
I think most people are there already. We only hear the people on the extreme sides for most issues on social media, tv, etc.
The "academic left". Lol, that's a new one.It's always the academic left, is it not?
The academic left is always looking to quash opposing points of view, be it a shouting down; an all-out prevention of speech by force, arriving at making common words and phrases verboten, preventing even the very presence of a conservative person, let alone the words; and in this thread's case, it stridently bans the opposition.
There you go. An atheist heaping some hate on the religious out of the blue. It appears almost every thread's got some dollop of religion hate, but you almost never see it the other way around. The reason? Atheists hate and they cannot contain their hatred. It just has to bubble up and get expressed.The "academic left". Lol, that's a new one.
Where's the "academic right"? Oh wait, they don't exist. They're too busy playing with fairy tales and ear plugs.
I'm not following you.Anybody here ever read about SCOTUS and the NeoNazis in Skokie, Illinois? They were allowed to march, regardless of the nastiness of the group. Based on that decision, the school board's edict is not in accord with the Constitution and the First Amendment.
The trouble is that scientists have been trying his approach for 30+ years only to have people lie, cheat and forge evidence against them. Now everything they have been predicting is coming true and it is a huge issue. The last 7 months are the hottest on record for each and every month, we've just lost five islands in the Pacific and even Donald "I don't believe in climate change" Trump is building defences against rising sea levels for his precious golf courses.
Nobody is outlawing or denying your right to access (climate-change-)denial materials and to air denial views. Just your right to make them part of the science curriculum taught to children in schools. They should be taught about, in fact, in civics class, showing the power of money to influence politics.
You know, you've surely seen some of the TV shows about people good at detecting lies, e.g. Lie to Me, The Mentalist, etc. Seems to be a cliche' now all over TV these days.Please don't try to persuade me that PhDs in the atmospheric sciences are all irrational idiots if they interpret the data differently from the "approved" scientists. I've seen highly-qualified professionals use the same data for studies yet draw conclusions 180 degrees apart.** Since the "blame it on people" group's view enables greater government control and therefore more grant money, at least a mild amount of suspicion seems justified.
-- An aside about theories, hypotheses, settled science, etc. --Hard to know why people disagree with you, if you don't let them speak. Me, if somebody disagrees with my view, I want them to articulate rational reasons.
At least, not a Muslim Kenyan Socialist Democratic President.Recently heard on Radio (NPR) that many conservatives acknowledge to global warming, many think is man caused, but will never admit under Democrat president.
yes they are terrified what it will take to fix it so it is easier to just deny it. it would make government bigger.
It wouldn't make the government bigger, more like it'd make the government move support away from something they like (coal and gas industries), to something they don't (green initiatives).yes they are terrified what it will take to fix it so it is easier to just deny it. it would make government bigger.
but they fear it will make government and world government more powerful. it is fear that causes the denial.It wouldn't make the government bigger, more like it'd make the government move support away from something they like (coal and gas industries), to something they don't (green initiatives).